ML18100B007

Monthly Operating Rept for Mar 1994 for Salem Generating Station,Unit 1.W/940414 Ltr

ML18100B007
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	03/31/1994
From:	HAGAN J, HELLER R, MORRONI M Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9404190333
Download: ML18100B007 (11)

Text

public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Salem Generating Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Dear Sir:

MONTHLY OPERATING REPORT SALEM NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-272 April 14, 1994 In compliance with Section 6.9.1.6, Reporting Requirements for the Salem Technical Specifications, the original copy of the monthly operating reports for the month of March 1994 are being sent to you. RH:pc Average Daily Unit Power Level Operating Data Report Unit Shutdowns and Power Reductions Safety Related Maintenance 10CFR50.59 Evaluations Operating Summary Refueling Information Sincerely yours, ger -ions cc: Mr. Thomas T. Martin Regional Administrator USNRC Region I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19046 Enclosures 8-1-7.R4 The Energy People . PDR ADDCK 05000272 R PDR f41 'l 1 95-2189 (1 OM) 12-89

DAILY UNIT POWER Docket No.: 50-272 Unit Name: Salem #1 Date: 04/10/94 Completed by: Mike Morroni Telephone:

339-2122 Month march 1994 Day Average Daily Power Level Day Average Daily Power Level (MWe-NET) (MWe-NET) 1 1108 17 881 2 1072 18 1092 3 1090 19 849 4 1134 20 797 5 1019 21 1068 6 949 22 1073 7 1065 23 1032 8 1037 24 1077 9 751 25 1079 10 755 26 1078 11 752 27 1062 12 849 28 1088 13 1101 29 1066 14 978 30 1037 15 979 31 776 16 978 P. 8.1-7 Rl OPERATING DATA REPORT Docket No: Date: completed by: Mike Morroni Telephone:

Operating Status 1. Unit Name Salem No. 1 Notes 2. Reporting Period March 1994 3. Licensed Thermal Power (MWt) 3411 4. Nameplate Rating (Gross MWe) 1170 5. Design Electrical Rating (Net MWe) 1115 6. Maximum Dependable Capacity(Gross MWe) 1149 7. Maximum Dependable Capacity (Net MWe) 1106 8. If Changes Occur in Capacity Ratings (items 3 through 7) Report, Give Reason None. 9. Power Level to Which Restricted, if any (Net MWe) 10. Reasons for Restrictions, if any 12. Hours in Reporting Period 12. No. of Hrs. Rx. was Critical 13. Reactor Reserve Shutdown Hrs. 14. Hours Generator On-Line 15. Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 16. Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 17. Gross Elec. Energy Generated (MWH) 18. Net Elec. Energy Gen. (MWH) 19. Unit Service Factor 20. Unit Availability Factor 21. Unit Capacity Factor (using MDC Net) 22. Unit Capacity Factor (using DER Net) 23. Unit Forced Outage Rate This Month 744 744 0 744 0 2294148 768560 736120 100 100 89.5 88.7 0 NA Year to Date 2160 1474.23 0 1099.85 0 4197597.6 1061210 984975 50.9 50.9 41.2 40.9 19.9 50-272 04/10/94 339-2122 since Last N/A Cumulative 146857 96606.2 0 92987.69 0 294976806.8 97597180 92922528 63.3 63.3 57.2 56.7 20.9 24. Shutdowns scheduled over next 6 months (type, date and duration of each) None. 25. If shutdown at end of Report Period, Estimated Date of startup: N A. 8-1-7.R2 NO. DATE 0360 3-1-94 F 0523 3-5-94 F 0358 3-6-94 F 0375 3-8-94 F 0381 3-11-94 F 0417 3-19-94 F 0433 3-23-94 F 0437 3-24-94 F 0444 3-29-94 F 0532 3-30-94 F 0533 3-30-94 F 1 2 F: Forced S: Scheduled DURATION TYPE 1 (HOURS) REASON 2 2.28 A 3.55 A 2.25 A 19.31 A 9.58 A 40.02 A 7.83 A 5.95 A 3.29 A 4.83 A 32.67 A Reason A-Equipment Failure (explain)

B-Maintenance or Test c-Refueling D-Requlatory Restriction UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTIONS 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 REPORT MONTH MARCH 1994 METHOD OF SHUTTING DOWN REACTOR LICENSE EVENT REPORT # ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF ----------

HF 3 Method: 1-Manual 2-Manual Scram SYSTEM CODE 4 E-Operator Training & License Examination F-Administrative 3-Automatic Scram 4-Continuation of Previous Outage 5-Load Reduction 9-0ther G-Operational Error (Explain)

H-Other (Explain)

UNIT SHUTDOWN AND POWER REDUCTIONS COMPONENT CODE 5 FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER FILTER 4 DOCKET NO.

UNIT NAME: Salem #1 DATE: 04-10-94 COMPLETED BY: Mike Morroni TELEPHONE:

339-2122 CAUSE AND CORRECTIVE ACTION TO PREVENT RECURRENCE CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS CIRCULATING WATER PUMPS/SCREENS 5 Exhibit G -Instructions for Preparation of Data* Entry Sheets for Licensee Event Report CLER) File Exhibit 1 -Same Source (NUREG-0161)

.SAFETY RELATED MAINTEN.CE MONTH: -MARCH 1994 WO NO UNIT DOCKE.O: UNIT NAME: DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

50-272 SALEM 1 APRIL 10, 1994 R. HELLER (609)339-5162 EQUIPMENT IDENTIFICATION This section is being deleted from the report as it is not required by either the Technical Specifications or the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. Deletion of this section from this and future reports was discussed with the NRC Region Salem Project Manager.

.10CFR50.

59 MONTH: -MARCH 1994 DOCKE .. O: UNIT NAME: DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

50-272 SALEM 1 APRIL 10, 1994 R. HELLER (609)339-5162 The following items were evaluated in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Federal Regulations lOCFR50.59.

The Station Operations Review Committee has reviewed and concurs with these evaluations.

ITEM A. Design Change Packages 1EC-3277 Pkg 1 lEC-3249 Pkg 1

SUMMARY

"Salem Pressure Resistant Barrier Review Project" -This DCP will verify, document and/or upgrade and install penetration seals, internal conduit seals and other barrier features required to provide compartmental isolation in HELB .barriers, Internal Flood barriers, and External Flood barriers at various elevations in the Auxiliary Building, Outer Penetration Buildings, Fuel Handling Buildings, and Service Water Intake Structure.

This DCP will establish compliance with existing regulatory commitments contained in the UFSAR and the corrective action statement contained in LER 272/91-009-02.

Specifically, the design and installation of barrier features installed in HELB, Internal Flood, and External Flood containment barriers will be verified and upgraded as necessary.

There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 94-020) "Replacement of Spray Valve lPSl and 1PS3 Internals" -Rev. 3 -Pressurizer Spray Valves 1PS1 and 1PS3 are being retrofitted with new trim, upgraded valve bonnet bolts, nuts and gaskets, valve packing and actuator spring. The actuator spring will be adjusted due to revised calculations for required actuator thrust obtained from OEM. Also, the bonnet extension for spray valve lPSl will be replaced in kind. A temporary modification associated with the lPSl bonnet will be removed. Also, an isolation valve, lCA-1963 will be added on the control air tubing to provide isolation between the control air supply line to the 1PS3 valve positioner and lPSl & 1PS3 I/P converters.

The valve trim and other material upgrades will eliminate problems of seat leakage, body to bonnet leakage and valve body to bonnet bolt corrosion.

This will reduce considerably the corrective maintenance work in the pressurizer

.10CFR50.

59 EVALUATIONSe ,MONTH: -MARCH 19 9 4 (cont'd) ITEM DOCKE.O: UNIT NAME: DATE; COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

SUMMARY

50-272 SALEM 1 APRIL 10, 1994 R. HELLER (609)339-5162 enclosure, which is a high radiation and heat stress area. The basic design and function of the spray valve has not changed. The OEM has recertified the valve to its original design criteria.

The modifications will grade the specific valve components to restore the valve reliability to its desired value. The testing will verify that the upper end of the valve flow still meets the minimum plant design criteria of 400 gpm. The proposed testing is bounded by the analysis for a stuck open safety valve. There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 94-022) B. Procedures and Revisions NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0023(Q) "Scaffolding

& Transient Load Control" -Rev. 1 -The purpose of this procedure is to provide instruction and assign responsibilities for controlling the erection of scaffolding at both the Salem and Hope Creek stations.

In addition, this procedure provides guidelines for the control and storage of transient loads at each plant. Revision 1 to this procedure incorporates several programmatic changes to the existing guidelines for the erection and control of scaffolding.

The first of these changes involves the requirement to enter all scaffolding into the scaffold control log located in the work control center. Another change will allow the seismic restraint requirements to be waived on scaffolding erected in a safety-related area, provided that a Limited Condition of Operation (LCO) has been entered for the associated equipment.

This revision also incorporates the requirements of the Pre-startup Walkdown previously included in NC.NA-AP.ZZ-0031(Q), Artificial Island Inspection/Housekeeping Program. Also incorporated into this revision are supplementary guidelines for the control and restraint of transient loads on the Refueling Floor (Reactor Building EL 201 1) at Hope Creek. The issuance of 10CFR50.59 EVALUATIONS41t MONTH: -MARCH 1994 (cont'd) ITEM C. SAR Change Notices SCN 93-60 M29-94-300 DOCKE.O: UNIT NAME: DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

SUMMARY

50-272 SALEM 1 APRIL 10, 1994 R. HELLER (609)339-5162 this revision does not reduce the margin of safety as defined in the bases for any Technical Specification. (SORC 93-024) "Main Steam Isolation Valves" -Generic wording changes were made to change main steam "stop" valve to correctly read main steam "isolation" valve {MSIV) and to change MSIV "closure" to correctly read MSIV "isolation".

These changes will more accurately reflect the function and operation of the MSIVs per engineering evaluation S-C-MDC-1302 and S-C-MEE-0846.

Discussions of smaller line breaks clarify the description of the Postulated Break Analysis and an explanation of the relationship between the MSIV test closure times and the MSIV isolation time used in the main steam pipe rupture analysis were also added to the interpretation of the procedure.

There is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification.

{SORC 94-025) "Section 17.2.17" -This change is being made to allow electronic retention of computer generated records, where such a record keeping system would generate certain records by entry of information and "electronic approvals" utilizing a computer terminal.

Such "character records" would not reflect the author's original "handwritten" signature or initials in the same way that reproduced facsimile copy of scanned copy would. Controlled access in the formulating and processing of such records and selected applications for electronic approvals will support programmatic authorization process. A review of the Hope Creek and Salem Generating station's Technical Specifications, Section 6.0, did not reveal any associated bases. Therefore, the proposal cannot reduce the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 94-026)

EVALUATIONS4t MONTH: -MARCH 1994 (cont'd) ITEM S-C-RCS-SEE-0866 DEF DES-90-01378 DOCKE.O: UNIT NAME: DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

SUMMARY

50-272 SALEM 1 APRIL 10, 1994 R. HELLER (609)339-5162 "Section 3.5.1.1 11 -The proposal revises SGS-UFSAR Section 3.5.1.1 to provide clarification that the Rod Control System MG set flywheels will not produce missiles under any anticipated accident condition.

The addition of this clarification does not affect plant operations and does not reduce the margin of safety as defined in the bases for any Technical Specifications. (SORC 94-026) "Section 9.5.6 11 -This change to UFSAR Section 9.5.6 is to reflect as-built configuration of the diesel generator start motor air system. The Technical Specifications do not provide a specific discussion of safety function related to the air start motors for the emergency diesel generator.

Therefore, there is no reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any Technical Specification. (SORC 94-026)

SALEM UNIT NO. 1 SALEM GENERATING STATION MONTHLY OPERATING

SUMMARY

-UNIT 1 MARCH 1994 The Unit began the period operating at essentially full power. Reactor power varied during the period as a precautionary measure due to the continuous challenges of heavy grass at the circulator inlet area. On March 9, 1994, was reduced to 75% as a precautionary measure due to the high potential that two circulators would have to be removed from service due to high grass conditions and a problem with a circulating water pump motor bearing. The motor was replaced and the Unit returned to 100% power on March 12, 1994. On March 16, 1994, power was reduced to 11% due to a high influx of grass and subsequent loss of circulators.

The circulators were restarted approximately one hour later and the Unit was restored to 100% power on March 17, 1994. On March 19, 1994, power was reduced to 77% for condenser water box cleaning due to the heavy grass conditions.

The Unit was restored to 100% power on March 21, 1994, and, with the exception of a brief load reduction on March 23, 1994, due to heavy grass conditions, continued to operate at 100% power until March 30, 1994. On March 30, 1994, heavy grass conditions caused an emergency trip of 13A & 13B circulators and load was reduced to 80%. The Unit continued to operate at reduced power throughout the remainder of the period.

,J(EFUELING INFORMATION e MONTH: -MARCH 1994 MONTH MARCH 1994 DOCKE.O: UNIT NAME: DATE: COMPLETED BY: TELEPHONE:

1. Refueling information has changed from last month: YES X NO 2. Scheduled date for next refueling:

MARCH 25, 1995 50-272 SALEM 1 APRIL 10, 1994 R. HELLER (609)339-5162

3. Scheduled date for restart following refueling:

MAY 23, 1995 4. a) Will Technical Specification changes or other license amendments be required?:

YES NO NOT DETERMINED TO DATE b) Has the reload fuel design been reviewed by the Station Operating Review Committee?:

YES NO X If no, when is it scheduled?:

MARCH 1995 5. Scheduled date(s) for submitting proposed licensing action: N/A 6. Important licensing considerations associated with refueling:

7. Number of Fuel Assemblies:

a. Incore 193 b. In Spent Fuel Storage 732 8. Present licensed spent fuel storage capacity:

1170 Future spent fuel storage capacity:

1170 9. Date of last refueling that can be discharged to the spent fuel pool assuming the present licensed capacity:

September 2001 8-1-7.R4